Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	edward_n	king_n	robert_n	4,365	5	8.8677	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91287	The subjection of all traytors, rebels, as well peers, as commons in Ireland, to the laws, statutes, and trials by juries of good and lawfull men of England, in the Kings Bench at Westminster, for treasons perpetuated by them in Ireland, or any foreign country out of the realm of England. Being an argument at law made in the Court of Kings Bench, Hil. 20 Caroli Regis, in the case of Connor Magwire, an Irish baron ... fully proving; that Irish peers, as well as commons may be lawfully tried in this court in England, by the statute of 35 H.8.c.2. for treasons committed by them in Ireland, by a Middlesex jury, and outed of a trial by Irish peers: which was accordingly adjudged, and he thereupon tried, condemned, executed as a traytor ... By William Prynne Esq; a bencher of Lincolnes Inne.	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1658 (1658)	Wing P4090; Thomason E945_5; ESTC R203350	65,819	94

before had used or practised in that Realme and therefore the Prisoner shall be tried by an ordinary Jury at this Bar not by his Irish Peers because if he were in Ireland for ought appears yet to me he should not be tried by his Peers there and in both these points the Book in Dyer the only Authority which seems to be strongest against is for me the words whereof are these in English The grand Chancellor of Ireland moved this question to the Queens councel If an Earl or Lord of Ireland who commits Treason in Ireland by rebellion shall be arraigned and put to his trial in England for this offence by the Statutes of 26 H. 8. c. 13. 32 H. 8. c. 4. 35 H. 8. 2 or 3 E. 6. And it was held by Wrey Dyer and Gerrard Attorney General That he could not Mark now their reasons for he cannot have his trial here by his Peers which is a full resolution in point of my third Question agreeing with what I have endeavoured with Arguments to prove and is an unquestionable Truth which I submit to Then it follows Nor can he be tried here by any Jury of twelve mark the reason Not because he is a Peer of Ireland and therefore ought to be tried by his Peers and not by a Jury for that had been full against me and it is now the only knot in que●tion but because he is not a subject of England but of Ireland and therefore he shall be tried there which reason extending as well to an Irish Commoner as Peer hath been since adjudged directly false absurd and against the Law both in Orourks Case and in Sir John Parrets Case and since in Mac-mahons Case and Sir Ed. Cook informs us in his Institutes on Lit. f. 261 that Wray himself in Orourks Case where this Opinion of his was vouched did openly disclaim that ever he delivered any such opinion as this but ever held the contrary to it and so it is a misreport in this particular After which the Book concludes thus And it is said that the usage to wit in Ireland to attaint a Peer Is by Parliament and not by Peers which comes full in terminis to what I have last insisted on and I am certain cannot be disproved Wherefore this authority in Dyer as to all that is truth and Law in it is wholly for me in the reason of the Law and against me only in what hath been since adjudged to be no Law I shall close up all with a stronger Case and authoritie than this in question which will over-rule this case and that was in * Trinity Term An. 33 H. 8. in the Kings Bench Edward Lord Gray immediatly before having been Lord Deputie in Ireland was endicted arraigned and attainted of High Treason by an ordinary Jurie in the Kings Bench in England for letting divers Rebels out of the Castle of Dublin and discharging Irish hostages and pledges that had been given for the securing the peace of Ireland and for not punishing one who said the King was an Heretick whilest he was Lord Deputy in Ireland For these Treasons all acted and committed in Ireland through an English Peer he was tried by an ordinary Jury in England by the Statute of 26 H. 8. c. 13. ratified in Ireland by 28 H. 8. c. 7. forecited which secluded him from his tryal by Peers being not saved by these Acts. Therefore a Fortiori shall these Statutes and this of 35 H 8. c. 2. 5 E. 6. cap. 1. made since his judgement exclude this Irish Lord being no English Peer from any tryal by his Peers Finally the Prologue of this Statute coupled with the body thereof puts a period to this question beyond all doubt or dispute For as much as some doubts and questions have been moved that certain kinds of Treasons c. committed out of the Kings Majesties Realm of England cannot nor may by the Common laws of this Realm be inquired heard and determined within this his said Realm of England For a plain remedy order and declaration therein to be had and made be it enacted c. that all manner of Treasons c. committed by any person o● persons ●out of this Realm of England shall be from henceforth inquired of heard and determined by the Kings Iustices of his Bench c. by good and lawfull men of the same Shire where the said Bench shall sit and be kept in like manner and form to all intents and purposes as if such Treasons had been done within the same Shire where they shall be so inquired of heard and determined The sole scope end purpose then of the King and Parliament in this Act being to take away all doubts and questions formerly moved in point of Law touching the tryal of treasons done out of the Realm before the Kings Justices of his Bench and Commissioners in England by a Iury and to make and enact a plain remedy and declaration therein for the future in manner aforesaid I humbly apprehend there can be no doubt nor question now moved whether this Prisoner ought to be tryed by his Peers in Ireland or England for this his most horrid Treason committed out of the Realm of England since this Statute so clearly declares and resolves the contrary in most plaine and positive words The rather because the Kings Patent creating him Baron of Ineskellin under the great Seal of Ireland maketh him only a Peer in Ireland and gives him only a Place and Voyce among the Peers and Nobles of Ireland in the Parliaments of Ireland not in England as he sets forth in his own * Plea in precise terms as the Patent made by King Edward the 4th to Robert Bold created him Baron of Rathtauth in Ireland and constituted him Unum Dominum Baronem omnium singulorum Parliamentorum magnorum Conciliorum nostrorum in terra nostra Hiberniae tenendorum habendum tenendum una cum stilo titulo nomine honore loco et sessione inde sibi et haeredibus suis masculis imperpetuum And as King Henry 8. made Thomas Viscount Rochford by the self-same Patent both Earl of Wiltshire infra regnum nostrum Angliae and Earl of Ormond in terra et dominio nostro Hiberniae only with several clauses of investitures several Habendums and several Creation-monies for each Title and Kingdom And as the Patents of all other Irish Earls Viscounts Lords and Barons in Ireland create and make them Peers only in Ireland not in England as * learned Mr. Selden informs us and their very Patents resolve in terminis And therefore quite exclude the Prisoner and all other Peers of Ireland from any tryal by their Peers in England either by the Proviso or body of this Statute or their Patents which are point-blanck against it And now I hope I have fully made good the point in question with all the several branches of it That this Act extends to Treason committed in

in Anglia similiter currant in Hibernia sub vovo sigillo nostro c. Teste meipso apud Woodstock 19 die Septemb. The Patent of King Iohn which this Patent mentions is that of Rot. Pat. 6 Johan Regis m. 6. n. 17. never yet printed Rex c. Justiciariis Baronibus Militibus et omnibus fidelibus suis c. sciatis quod dedimus potestatem Justiciariis nostris Hibernioe quod brevia sua currant per terram nostram et potestatem Hiberniae scilicet Breve de Recto de feodo aimidiae Militis et infra et erit terminus de morte aut post transfretationem Henrici patris nostri de Hibernia in Angliam Et Breve de Nova disseisina et erit terminus post primam Coronationem nostram apud Cant. Et Breve de Fugitivis et Nativis et ejus erit terminus post captionem Dublin Et Breve de divisis faciendis inter duas villas exceptis B●roniis Et ideo vobis mandamus et firmiter praecipimus quod haec it a fieri et firmiter teneri * per ●otam potest atem nostram Hiberniae faciatis Teste meipso apud Westm. 2 Novemb. In the 41 year of his Reign Claus. 41 H. 3. m. 11. dors I find this memorable writ touching the confirmation and Customes of England setled in Ireland by assent of the Prelates and great men thereof Rex Thesaurario et Baronibus de Scaccario Dublin salutem Quia de assensu et vosuntate Praesatorum Magnatum terrae Hiberniae dudum fuit provisum et concessum quod eisdem legibus uterentur in terra illa quibus homines regni nostri utuntur in regno illo et quod eadem Brevia quoad terras tenementa recuperanda currerent in terra illa quae currunt in regno praedicto sicut nostis Et dicta provisio concessio omnibus retroactis temporibus fuerit obtenta approbata miramur quamplurimum quod sicut ex insinua●ione venerabilis patris Thomae Lismor Episcopi accepimus emanare permisistis ex Cancellaria Edwardi filii nostri in Hibernia contra consuetud inem optentam formam Brevium in regno nostro ufitatam Breve subscriptum contra praefatum Episcopum in hac verba E. illustris Regis Angliae primogenitus Vic. Waterford salutem Precipe Thomae Lismor Episcopo quod juste sine dilatione reddat Waltero Episcopo Waterford Maneria de Archmordeglan Kilmordri Motha cum pertinentiis quae clamat esse jus Ecclesiae suae in quae idem Episcopus non habet ingressum nisi per Alanum quondam Lismor Episcopum cui Griffinus quondam Lismor Episcopus illa demisit qui in illa se intrusit post mortem Roberti quondam Lismor Episcopi qui inde injuste sine judicio dissesuit Robertum quondam Waterford Episcopum praedecessorem Episcopi post ultimum reditum c. Quia vero dictum Breve tam dissonum est et contra leges consuetudines in Regno nostro optentas formas brevium nostrorum ibidem approbatas praesertim cum Breve ingressus non transeat tertiam personam nec ratione intrusionis in terram aliquem post mortem alicujus competat actio alicui de terra illa nisi illi cui per mortem illam jus debetur in eadem Nec enim dicitur intrusor qui jure haereditario vel ratione Ecclesiae suae succedit praedecessori sui in hiis de quibus idem praedecessor fuit seisitus in Dominico suo ut de feodo die quo obiit Vobis mandamus quod si●dictum Breve a Cancellaria praedicta in forma praedicta emanaverit executionem ejusdem Brevis supersedeatis revocantes sine dilatione quicquid per idem Breve actum fuerit in Curia praefati filii nostri Teste apud Wynd 27 die Januar. Eodem modo scribitur Alano la Suche Justic. Hiberniae Waleranno de Wellesly sociis suis Justiciariis itinererantibus ut supra In the 5th year of King Edward 3. rot Pat. 5 E. 3. parte 1. memb. 25 It was enacted in a Parliament that year in England amongst other things Quod una eadem Lex fiat tam Hibernicis quam Anglicis excepta servitute V●cagiorum penes Dominos suos c. by a Parliament then holden in Ireland Yet notwithstanding all these Patents Charters Acts the benefit of the great Charter and of the Liberties Laws and Customs of England extended not to all Ireland and the Irish therein dwelling but only to such parts of Ireland as were reduced and divided into Counties and possessed by the English Colonies and to the English men inhabiting in Ireland and such Irish within the English Pale as lived in due subjection and obedience to the Kings of England or were specially endenized by their Parents to them not to the Irish Countries and Colonies which were not reduced into Counties and under the obedience of the Kings of England amounting to more than two third parts of Ireland in extent of Ground who had no benefit of the Laws or Liberties of England but by special Grants and Charters of indenization from the Kings of England which some Septs of the Irish and others purchased from our Kings as Sir John Davis proves at large in his Irish Reports in the Case of Tanistry fol. 37 38 39. and the Records there cited To which I shall add these following Records not mentioned by him fully evidencing this Truth Claus. 37. H. 3. m. 15. Dors. Rex Justic. Hiberniae salutem Monstravit nobis Mamorth Offerthierim Rothericus frater ejus quod Antecessores sui ipse licet Hibernienses fuissent semper tamen firmiter fuerunt ad fidem servitium nostrum praedecessorum nostrorum Regum Angliae ad Conquestum una cum Anglicis faciendum super Hibernienses Et ideo vobis mandamns quod si it a est ●●●c non permittas ipsos Mamorth Rodericum repelli●●● quin possint terras vendicare in quibus jus habent stcut quilibet Anglicus Quia si ipsi Antecessores sui sic se habu●runt cum Anglicis quamvis Hibernienses injustum est licet Hibernienses sint quod exceptione qua repelluntur Ibernenses a vendicatione terrarum aliis repellantur T●ste c. By this Record it is apparant that all Irishmen but those whose Ancestors joyned with our Kings in the conquest of Ireland and were loyal Subjects to our Kings had no benefit of the Kings Writs and Laws to claim or recover Lands in Ireland in 37 H. 3. Hereupon divers native Irish men purchased several Patents from our Kings granted out of special grace to enable themselves and their Posterity to enjoy the benefit of the English Laws in Ireland for which I shall cire these few ensuing Presidents instead of many of like nature Pat 17. Johan Reg. memb. 15. together with

Pat. 12. E. 1. m. 11. Pro diversis in Hibernia quod uti possint Legibus Angliae in Hibernia Rex omnibus ballivis fidelibus suis Hiberniae ad quos c. salutem Vol●ntes Giraldo fil Johannis Hibernico gratiam facere specialem concedimus pro nobis Haeredibus no●tris quod idem Geraldus liberi sui quos legitime procreaverit hanc habeant libertatem quod ipsi de caete●o in Hibernia utantur legibus Anglicanis firmiter inhibemus ne quis ●os contra hanc concessionem nostram vexet in aliquo vel perturbet In cujus c. T. Rege apud Carnarvan 30 die Maij Consimiles literae habet Margeria de Lessan Henricus de Lessan Petrus de Lessan Andreas de Lessan Bene dictus fil Johannis Ardmagh Willielmus Heuke Hibernici In cujus c. Teste ut supra Pat. 18. E. 1. m. 24. Rex omnibus Ballivis fidelibus suis in Hibernia ad quos c. salutem Volentes Isamaiae filiae Oragilig Matildae fil Oragilig Hibernicis graciam facere specialem concedimus pro nobis haereaibus nostris quod eadem Isamaia Matilda ad totam vitam suam hanc habeant libertatem videlicit quod ipsae de caetero in Hibernia utantur legibus Anglicanis fi●miter inhibemus ne quis eas contra ●anc concessionem nostram vexet in aliquo vel perturbet In cujus c. T. Rege apud Westm. 12 die Junii per ipsum Regem Pat. 19. E. 1. m. 20. Rex omnibus ad quos c. salutem Sciatis quod de gratia nostra speciali concessimus Willielmo filio Carmok Clerico quod ipse omnes posteri sui imperpetuum Lege consuetudine Anglicana utantur in terra nostra Hiberniae i●a quod ipsi per alias leges consuetudines p●r nos ministros nostros quoscunque de caetero non deducantur contra voluntatem suam sed quod ipsi in vita sua morte de caetero libertate gaudeant Anglicana In cujus c. Teste Rege apud Ashermg 22 die Jan. The like Patent is granted Mauricio de Bre. Hibernico Pat. 24. E. 1. m. 3. These Records with Claus. 2. E. 3. m. 17. Rex dilecto fideli suo Johanni Darcy de Nevien Justiciario suo Hiberniae salutem Exparte quorundam hominnm de Hibernia extitit supplicatum Ut per statutum inde faciendum concedere velimus quod omnes Hibernici qui voluerint legibus utantur Anglicanis it a quod necesse non habeant super has chartas aliquas a nobis impetrare Nos igitur certior ari volentes si sine alieno prae●●d●cio praemissis annuer ●valeamus vobis mandamus quod voluntatem magnatum terrae illius in proximo Parliamento ibidem tenendo super hoc cum ailigentia pers●rutari faciatis de eo quod inveneritis una cum vestro consilio ad visam●nto nos distincte aperte cum celeritate qua potestis certificetis hoc breve nostrum nobis remittentes which compared with Claus. 5. E. 3. part 1. m. 25. Pro hominibust●rrae Hiberniae de Lege ANGLIAE UTENDA in custodiis recuper andis c. are an unanswerable evidence beyond contradiction That the great Charter Liberties Customs and Laws of England granted to those of Ireland by King John Henry the third Edward the first and third extended only to the English Subjects inhabiting Ireland and to such Irish who lived in English Counties in due subjection to the Kings of England or were by special Charters of indenization enabled to enjoy the benefit of them who were but few in consideration of the rest of the Irish Nobility Gentry and Commons retaining their ancient Brehon Laws and would not submit to the Laws of England nor Government of our Kings against whom they frequently rebelled being reputed rather Enemies than Rebels and usually so stiled in the Statutes of Ireland till the Statute of 33 H. 8. c. 9. as appears by the Statutes of 18 H. 6. c. 3. 25 H. 6. c. 4 5. 28 H. 6. c. 1. 3 E. 4. c. 2. 5 E. 4. c. 6. 18 E. 4. c. 2. 10 H. 7. c. 9 10 17 19. 28 H. 8. c. 11. by Sir John Davis Irish Reports in the Case of Tanistry fol. 39. the common Laws and Statutes of England being not universally received or established throughout the whole Realm of Ireland till after the Statutes of 3 and 4 Phil. and Mar. c. 3. 11 Eliz. c. 9. and King James his Proclamation in the third yeer of his reign or at leastwise till the Statutes of 8 E. 4. c. 1. or 10 H. 7. c. 22. which established all the Statutes made in England concerning or belonging to the good of the same only as to the Englishry or English Pale and Counties not to the Irishery as the Statutes of 17 H. 7. c. 8 9 10 11 13 17 19. 35 H. 6. c. 3. 5 Ed. 4. c. 3 4 5. 13 H. 8. c. 3. 28 H. 8. c. 15. made in Ireland with other Acts resolve which the Lord Magwire confesseth in his Plea and his Council cannot deny Now the Lord Magwire being none of the English Pale or Irish Sept Liege Subjects to our Kings but of the Irishry and professed Enemies to our Kings as the Irish Annals and Statutes inform us the Statute of Magna Charta and the Laws Liberties and Customs of England granted to the English and loyal Irish Subjects in Ireland and so this trial by Peers could not extend to his ancestors till after the Statutes of 8 E. 4. or 10 H. 7. of 35 H. 8. c. 1. yea after the Statutes of 3 and 4 Ph. and Ma. c. 3. and 11 Eliz. c. 9. for reducing the Irishry into Counties and under the Laws and Statutes of England to which they were not formerly subject And from these Patents of King John and Henry the third forecited and the Statutes of 8 E 4. and 10 H. 7. till 35 H. 8. chap. 1. No one president of any one Irish Peers trial by his Peers in Ireland in any case whatsoever can be produced Therefore certainly there was no such trial known or in use in Ireland before 35 H. 8. nor any president of it since till one of late and una Hirundo non facit Ver. If then the Peers of Ireland before the making of this Act of 35 H. 8. were never actually tried by their Peers for any treason done in Ireland for ought can be proved and there be no express Act for any trial by Peers there for any Treason but only the Act of 2 Eliz. c. 1. and 6. and that only for special Treasons within those Laws which are none of those for which the Prisoner stands here indicted I may safely conclude That this Law of 35 H. 8. never intended to preserve to Irish Peers a trial by their Peers in Ireland which kinde of trial was never

3. chap. 8. 4 E. 4. chap. 1. 3 H. 7. chap. 8. 14 H. 4. Rastal Parceners 2. 27 E. 3. of the Staple chap. 1. 18 14 Eliz. chap. 5. 1 H. 7. ass 3. 3 H. 7. fol. 10. 2 R. 3. f. 12. and Cooks 7 Report Calvins Case f. 17 22 23. 4 Instit. p. 35. it being so resolved as to this purpose by all the Judges of England in Orourks and Sir John Parrets Cases cited in Calvins Case and adjudged in Mac-mahons Case tried at this Bar the last Term that this Act of 35 H. 8. ● 2. bindes those of Ireland for Treasons there committed makes them subject to a trial here whether Peers or Commoners as I have already proved 5ly It is unquestionable That every Commoner of Ireland hath as large as full an interest in Magna Charta the Laws and Priviledges of England and Ireland and as much right to be tried in Ireland for Treason there committed by an Irish Jury as any Peer in Ireland hath in or by them to be tried there by his Peers these Laws being no respecters of persons and every mans birth right alike of Commons as much as of Peers as the Laws and great Charter of England are Magna Charta being as largly made and as amply granted to the meanest Freeman as to the greatest Peers of England and Ireland as the Prologue and 9 14 15 19 21 22 26 27 29 Chapters thereof resolve Since then this Act of 35 H. 8. chap. 2. doth without all controversie as hath been resolved in the forecited Case deprive the Commoners of Ireland of a Trial in Ireland by Irish Commoners and subjects them to a trial by an English Jury here for Treasons there committed for which by the common Law the Customes of Ireland and Magna Charta before the Statute of 26 H. 8. and this Act of 35 H. 8. they could be no where tried but only in Ireland not in England as is collected from the Case of Sir Elias Ashburnam Tr. 18 E. 3. coram Rege Rot. 14. cited by Sir Edward Cook in his 4 Instit. p. 356. the principal case that can be objected against me which makes nothing to the purpose being long before these Statutes were made Therefore by the self same reason it shall take away the trial of Irish Peers in Ireland and England by Irish or English Peers for Treasons perpetrated by them in Ireland and subject them to a trial by an ordinary English Jury at this Bar or before Commissioners in any County of England as I have already proved which Jury here are in truth Peers to all Irish Peers being here no Peers at all but onely Commoners If it be objected That this Law of 35 H. 8. chap. 2. cannot abrogate Magna Charta all Acts and Iudgements against Magna Charta being declared voyd by 25 E. 1. ch. 1. 2 4. 28 E. 1. ch. 1. 42 E. 3. ch. 1. Therefore it shall not take away the tryal by Peerage from Irish Peers I answer 1. That you may by like reason object that it cannot take away a Tryal in Ireland by an Irish Jury from Irish Commoners seeing it cannot repeal Magna Charta and the Common-law But this objection is yielded and adjudged idle in case of an Irish Commoner therefore it is and must be so in case of an Irish Peer 2ly The objected Statutes do make void and null all Acts and Statutes made against Magna Charta before the Parliaments wherein they were made but they extend not at all to future real Parliaments and their Acts subsequent Parliaments having alwaies had power to control alter abrogate precedent Acts yea the very Common-law and Great Charter it self when inconvenient or defective as all our Books accord Therefore Sir Edward Cook in his 4 Institutes p. 42. resolves and proves at large by 11 R. 2. c. 3. 5 ro● Parl. n. 22. 48 49. 1 H. 4. c. 3. 2 H. 4. c. 22. 21 R. 2. c. ●6 1 H. 4. n. 48. 70. 144. 21 R. 2. n. 20 21. 36 37 85 86 89 90. that Acts yea and Oaths against the lawfull power of subsequent Parliaments that they shall not repeal such and such Laws though mischievous or unjust bind not at all and are merely idle For ●odem modo quo quid constituitur dissolvitur those who have power to make any Laws having as great as full a power to controll alter or repeal them when they see cause and necessity for it as you may read in Rastals and Poultons Abridgements of Statutes and the Statutes at large repealing former Acts and how often Magna Charta hath been altered supplied or * repealed in some particulars in and by our Parliaments since its making by subsequent Acts both by prescribing creating new imprisonments forfeitures corporal punishments fines executions treasons capital offences customs imposts not then known or different waies or places of tryal not then in use in Cases of forein Treasons and the like by a Jury in England not then usual but since confirmed by the Statutes of 26 H. 8. c. 13. 28 H. 8. c. 25. 33 H. 8. c. 27. 35 H. 8. c. 2. 5 6 E. 6. c. 11. contrary to or * different from Magna Charta and the Common law 2 E. 6. c. 24. is so well known to all Lawyers that I will not spend breath to prove it 3ly I answer that this Act of 35 H. 8. doth both alter and in some sort repeal Magna Charta and the Common-law as to the point and place of trying forein Treasons in England it self as to English Peers and Commoners to whom alone the great Charter was first granted they being not tryable in England by Iury or Peers for any forein treasons by the Common-law or great Charter Therefore a Fortiori it must both alter and repeal the Common-law and great Charter as to Irish Subjects for whom the great Charter was never originally made not yet directly confirmed to them by 10 H. 7. but only implicitly and doubtfully at most as I have proved 4ly I answer that this Act of 35 H. 8. doth no waies abrogate or alter Magna Charta in truth or reality but rather ratifie confirm it in the form and manner of this Tryal though not in the place For Magwire being only a Peer in Ireland but not in England Every Free-man of England that shall be impanneled to try him is in truth law his Peer here And this Act enacting that he shall be tryed not by Marshal-law or the Judges themselves but by good and lawfull men of the Shyre where the Kings Bench shall sit who are his equals and Peers in England and saving the Tryal by Peers to every Peer of this Realm after his indictment found by Jury This way and form of tryal by Jury in England being then and now the Law of the Land is no contradiction or repeal at all but a direct pursute and confirmation thereof according to its letter

perpetrated by an indifferent honest lawfull English Jury upon an endictment found by the grand Inquest than thus to kill behead such Malefactors in Ireland and seise both them and their Goods as Enemies and ransome them at pleasure without Tryal Jury or Endictment and not only to indemnifie but reward those that do it by Laws there made by the English and Irish themselves which will answer all Objections and wipe off the least shadow of Injustice in this Case and tryal The third Objection is this That if Irish Peers had been within this Law there being so many rebellions in Ireland since its enacting we should have had some Presidents of Irish Peers here tried by Jurie ere this But there is no such President extant therefore certainlie Irish Peers for Treasons perpetrated in Ireland are out of this Act To this I answer 1. That no Irish Peers have been tried by their Peers in Ireland for treasons since this Act ergo they are within i● 2. That this Argument is merely fallacious and non concludant for the reason why no Irish Peers have been tried here since this Law by vertue of it is not because they were not deemed within it but for other reasons 1. Because most of the Irish Peers who have been in actual rebellion since this Law were * either actually slain in the wars or fled the Kingdom or else were received into grace and pardoned before tryal upon their submissions or else attainted and executed by Act of Parliament or by Martial-law in Ireland And by these means onlie avoided their Trials here 2ly Because some Irish Rebels as great as Magwire or anie of their Peers in power and estate have been heretofore tried and executed for Treason in England by vertue of this Law though brought over hither from Ireland against their wills as Orourke and Sir John Parrot of old and Mac-Mahon the last Term and the Tryals of these three here are direct Presidents in point and good warrant by this very Act for the Tryal also of this Irish Peer as I have proved 3ly This Statute is not very antient yet still in as full force as ever and if this be the first President of an Irish Peer that came judicially in question here in England to be tryed upon it since its making it is no Argument he is out of this Law but rather an Inducement to make him a leading President to those rebellious Peers of that Nation who have been the Ring-leaders of the ordinary Commons there in this grand Rebellion there being no President Judgement nor foild season against it Yea ●ome Judgements in case of Irish Commons and many unanswerable reasons for it The fourth Objection is the opinion of the Book in Dyer f. 360. ●● forecited recited in Cromptons Jurisdiction of Courts f. 23. a. and Mr. St. Johns Argument at Law at Straffords Attainder p. 63. That an Irish Peer cannot be tryed here in England for Treason done in Ireland neither by his Peers nor by a Jury because he is no Subject of England To this I have * already given an Answer and shall here only adde 1. That the only reason given in the Book hath been since several times adjudged to be no reason at all nor Law by all the Judges of England a Subject of Ireland being a * Subject to the King of England in all places as is adjudged in Calvins Case and that Wrey disclaimed any such opinion delivered by him as is there reported Therefore the reason of this opinion being adjudged erroneous and no Law the opinion it self grounded on it must needs be so too The rather because the opinion there cited was upon a Case casually put and moved out of Court by way of discourse without study or argument and suddenly delivered only by Dyer and Gerrard since Wrey disclaimed it but not given upon any cause actually depending or debated and argued in Court 2ly That it is a full authority for me both because it determines there can be no Tryal of an Irish Peer by his Peers in England but only by a Jury and that in Ireland it self Peers are not used to be tryed by Peers but attainted by Act of Parliament Therefore an authority point-blank against the Prisoners plea The 5th Objection is Orourks Case which in Judge Andersons own Book of Reports is put thus Whether Orourk an Irish Subject and no Peer nor Baron of Ireland might be tryed by this Act here in England for Treasons committed in Ireland which words nient esteant un Peer ou Baron de Ireland in the putting of the Case seems to intimate that in that Case the opinion of the Judges was that an Irish Peer was not within this Act To which I shall return this brief Answer That this clause not being a Peer or Baron in Ireland in the putting of that Case was only a description of the quality of his person he being no Peer or Baron of that Realm not any point in or part of the Case there being not one syllable in the whole debate or Argument of it by way of admission or otherwise that an Irish Peer was not within this Act And in this very Case the Judges resolved the Book in Dyer to be no Law and Wrey disclaimed any such opinion of his therein reported as Sir Edward Cooks Institutes on Littleton fol. 261. b. records The 6th Objection is this intimated in an Order of the Lords House That this may much concern the Peers of England For this Law for trying forein Treasons is enacted in Ireland and so by colour of it English Peers may be sent over into Ireland to be tryed there by a Jury of Irish Commoners for Treasons done in England as well as Irish Peers sent thence to be tryed by ordinarie Juries here in England for Treasons committed in Ireland I answer 1. That there is no such Law extant in Ireland that I can fi●d among all their printed Statutes so as this is a vain surmise But 2ly if there were any such Law there yet England being the supreme Realm to Ireland may make Laws in the Parliament here to bind the Irish Peers and Commons but the Parliament in Ireland being a * subordinate Realm to England never yet did nor can make any Laws at all to bind any English Peers or Commons for things done in England untill the Rebels there shall be able to conquer England which I hope they never shall as we have conquer'd them Therefore we need not fear any such obliging Laws of theirs or the tryal of English Peers in Ireland So as this vain fancy is quite out of Dores and the Lords themselves upon conference with the Commons have been fully satisfied that this Case no waies concerneth the Peers of England whose Tryal by their Peers is by direct proviso saved to them in this Act and therefore cannot come in question or be taken from them by pretence of any such